North Norfolk Liberal Democrats
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
North Norfolk Liberal Democrats Ward Boundary Proposals 5 September 2016 1 Table of Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 3 Proposed wards ................................................................................................................. 4 Coastal wards ...................................................................................................................... 4 1. Heath ..................................................................................................................................... 4 2. Runtons ................................................................................................................................ 4 3. Poppyland ........................................................................................................................... 5 4. Mundesley ........................................................................................................................... 5 5. Bacton ................................................................................................................................... 5 6. Happisburgh ....................................................................................................................... 6 Broads ................................................................................................................................... 7 7. Hoveton ................................................................................................................................ 7 8. Broads .................................................................................................................................. 7 9. Waterside ............................................................................................................................ 7 Market Towns ..................................................................................................................... 9 10. Fakenham ....................................................................................................................... 9 11. Holt ................................................................................................................................... 9 12. North Walsham ............................................................................................................. 9 13. Stalham and Sutton ................................................................................................... 11 Coastal Towns .................................................................................................................. 12 14. Wells ............................................................................................................................... 12 15. Sheringham .................................................................................................................. 12 16. Cromer ........................................................................................................................... 13 Rural wards ...................................................................................................................... 14 17. Raynham Ward ........................................................................................................... 14 18. Ryburgh ......................................................................................................................... 14 19. Walsingham ................................................................................................................. 15 20. Astley ............................................................................................................................. 16 21. Briston ........................................................................................................................... 16 22. Corpusty ........................................................................................................................ 16 23. Chaucer ......................................................................................................................... 17 24. Erpingham .................................................................................................................... 18 25. Market ........................................................................................................................... 18 26. Worstead ...................................................................................................................... 18 27. Smallburgh ................................................................................................................... 19 Proposed ward map ....................................................................................................... 20 2 Introduction The District of North Norfolk spans a diverse ribbon of countryside running nearly 50 miles from Holkham in the West to Horsey in the East. It encompasses inland market towns like North Walsham and Fakenham, coastal tourist towns like Wells and Cromer, and several very rural parishes with less than 100 electors. And to the North it is edged by a coastline that is receding in the West and eroding (rapidly in places) to the East. In seeking to reduce the number of councillors across the District by nearly 20%, the challenges should not be underestimated of ensuring that councillors each represent wards that are logical, and that are also capable of being represented effectively by councillors who may also have working or caring commitments. The proposed warding arrangements in this report aim to group parishes into areas that are geographically coherent, with similar local issues and representational priorities. As far as possible, coastal parishes are placed into wards with other coastal parishes to create a group of councillors with a strong interest in championing coastal issues across the District. In each of the towns across the District a single ward (with one or two members) is proposed to encompass the whole town centre so that the uniQue challenges facing businesses and consumers in each town can be tackled in a joined-up way. Certain wards in many of the towns also include surrounding parishes, many of which have close and important links with their local socio-economic hub and stand to benefit from an approach to representation which understands the symbiotic relationship between towns and their hinterland. In general, the most rural parishes are grouped together. This creates a number of very large rural wards, and the councillors representing those wards will face substantial additional time commitments in liaising with the large number of separate parishes and community groups in their wards. However, the benefits of ensuring dedicated champions for rural North Norfolk are considered to outweigh the practical disadvantages of such wards. With one exception, town polling district boundaries have been devised using an assumption that the level of growth projected for that town will be evenly spread across the urban centre. This has been necessitated by the failure of Council Officers to provide the necessary information to enable a more precise approach to be taken but is not generally considered to be an unrealistic representation of the anticipated pattern of development in the relevant towns. In North Walsham, all of the projected growth has been located in West Ward, which is considered an accurate representation of where the bulk of projected growth will fall. 3 Proposed wards Coastal wards 1. Heath Blakeney 627 Weybourne 451 Cley 365 Stiffkey 182 Kelling 154 Salthouse 129 Wiveton 109 Morston 74 Total = 2091 (96% of target) The stretch of coastline between Wells and Sheringham has much in common. Each of the villages has a similar architectural vernacular, landscape and natural habitats, and each benefits from similar conservation protections. They also face similar pressures on issues like second home ownership (and the associated development), access to services, transport, and communications infrastructure. The boundary of this ward would mirror very closely the boundary of the Norfolk Coast Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Additionally, the parishes along this stretch of coast possess some of the most valuable and imposing churches in the District, a relic of an earlier time when many of the villages had substantial commercial harbours. This would enable the councillor for this ward to ensure that the complex conservation concerns of the area are given the emphasis they need. 2. Runtons Aylmerton 380 Felbrigg 159 The Runtons 1432 Total = 1971 (90% of target) The Runtons, Aylmerton and Felbrigg are joined together by their geological and historical links. The main A148 runs through all three parishes and they come together at the Felbrigg road junction which is shortly to receive infrastructure investment in the form of a new roundabout, to better manage the traffic between these parishes. 4 Runton values its distinct character, and residents are strongly opposed to changes which would reduce its independence from the nearby towns of Cromer and Sheringham. In this respect, it would not comfortably sit in the same ward as Beeston Regis, which lacks any clearly-defined boundary with Sheringham and thus relates much more closely to the town. The boundary of this ward would mirror very closely the boundary of the Norfolk Coast Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which incorporates the vast majority of each parish,